The next round of the ICANN new gTLD program is coming and applicants will need to select a backend registry provider. This publication is not a paid one and I am not pointing to one specific provider. This is just "what I would do" if I needed to select a service provider in the two cases below:
- A backend Registry for a .BRAND new gTLD application;
- A backend Registry for a new gTLD project dedicated to selling domain names, whatever type of application: community, generic or geographic.
Which .BRAND new gTLD Backend registry provider?
Which new gTLD Backend Registry provider to sell domain names?
- There are too many extensions with low volumes (which also means that they are not profitable enough for GoDaddy),
- Be on front page of GoDaddy is probably not a free service so why would GoDaddy bother about an extension...which is hosted at another backend registry provider? Wouldn't you focus on your client's success instead of those of another provider? Of course you would.
- Also and that is very important, GoDaddy can generate an income thank to its famous Registrar but also now, thank to its backend registry service so again: why bother about adding an extension to its Registrar platform where it would earn on the Registrar service only (selling domain names)?
- Adding a new extension requires time and effort.
What Backend Registry offer I would consider:
- A full offer where the backend registry also submits and follows the submission of my application at the ICANN: not a third party nor a lawyer with no ICANN knowledge.
- Knowledge of my provider about a possible objection and how to face it.
- A capacity to accredit my extension at the backend registry's Registrar(s) if it has any. Note that many backend registries are not public Registrars and Registrars are the mandatory network to sell domain names.
- A provider who has passed the ICANN technical accreditation: if there are more than 1,000 applications in the next round, no one knows if all applications will be submit and validated. What about those new backend registry providers who are not yet accredited by the ICANN: wouldn't it be less risky to select one that is already accredited?